IN RE DANIEL WHITLEY MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of DANIEL WHITLEY, BRIAN
WHITLEY and STACIE WHITLEY, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
September 3, 1999
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 212179
Oakland Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 86-044847 NA
JOSEPH WHITLEY,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
EDNA WHITLEY,
Respondent.
Before: Markman P.J., and Saad and P. D. Houk*, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from a family court order terminating his parental rights
to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) and (ii); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(c)(i) and (ii).1
We affirm. This case is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
The family court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination were
established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5.974(I), In re Miller, 433 Mich 331; 445 NW2d
161 (1989). Moreover, contrary to what respondent-appellant asserts, termination was fully authorized
by MCR 5.974. Nor does respondent-appellant contend that termination of his parental rights was
clearly not in the children’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5); In re
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1
Hall-Smith, 222 Mich App 470, 473; 564 NW2d 156 (1997). Thus, the family court did not err in
terminating respondent-appellant’s parental rights to the children. In re Hall-Smith, supra.
Affirmed.
/s/ Stephen J. Markman
/s/ Henry William Saad
/s/ Peter D. Houk
1
Respondent-appellant also asserts that his parental rights were terminated under § 19b(3)(g), but the
record does not indicate that termination was ordered pursuant to that statutory subsection.
-2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
